GIS for Water Utilities Training Course

Participants can select and document suitable spatial reference controls for utility data.

• Geographic and projected coordinate reference systems distinguished for utility mapping
• Datum transformations assessed before combining survey, CAD, and GIS datasets
• Horizontal accuracy classes specified for valves, mains, manholes, and service connections
• GNSS error sources including multipath, canopy, correction age, and receiver quality
• Survey-control points recorded with coordinates, accuracy metadata, and custody information
• Positional uncertainty displayed through confidence classes and map symbology

Participants can create an asset data model with controlled identifiers and lifecycle attributes.

• Feature classes structured for mains, valves, hydrants, pumps, manholes, and laterals
• Unique asset identifiers reconciled across GIS, work management, and finance systems
• Domains and subtypes control material, diameter, status, ownership, and installation method
• Lifecycle attributes distinguish installed, active, abandoned, planned, and removed assets
• Relationship classes link linear assets to fittings, inspections, and maintenance history
• Required fields defined for design, construction, operations, and renewal decisions

Participants can prepare legacy utility records for controlled migration into GIS.

• Source inventory classifies paper plans, CAD drawings, registers, surveys, and databases
• ETL mappings align legacy fields with approved utility asset attributes
• Conflation rules match duplicate mains using proximity, material, diameter, and installation date
• Georeferencing scanned plans uses control points and residual-error assessment
• CAD layer translation preserves asset semantics, dimensions, and source lineage
• Migration exceptions documented through issue registers, ownership, and resolution dates

Participants can define and apply measurable quality rules for utility GIS datasets.

• Completeness checks identify missing assets, attributes, inspection dates, and source records
• Validity rules test allowable values, date ranges, diameters, and material codes
• Consistency tests compare asset status between GIS and maintenance systems
• Topology validation detects overshoots, gaps, duplicate features, and disconnected endpoints
• Positional-accuracy sampling compares mapped features against surveyed field locations
• Data-quality scorecards report defect counts, severity, ownership, and closure progress

Participants can build connected network data suitable for tracing and operational analysis.

• Geometric network connectivity established through coincident endpoints and junction features
• Flow direction assigned using elevation, operational configuration, and verified observations
• Connectivity rules distinguish mains, service lines, fittings, valves, and meters
• Network snapping tolerances controlled to prevent false connections between nearby assets
• Disconnected subnetworks investigated through topology errors and source-document review
• Versioned edits reviewed before releasing connectivity changes to operational users

Participants can perform trace and isolation analysis for water distribution incidents.

• Upstream and downstream traces identify affected pipes, valves, customers, and facilities
• Valve isolation analysis tests shutdown plans for planned maintenance and bursts
• Pressure zones mapped from district boundaries, valves, reservoirs, and pump stations
• Critical customer locations classified for hospitals, schools, industry, and emergency services
• Dead-end mains detected through network degree analysis and operational review
• Isolation maps communicate valve sequences, affected properties, and restoration priorities

Participants can analyse collection-system connectivity, catchments and overflow risk locations.

• Gravity sewer flow paths derived from invert levels, pipe direction, and manhole connections
• Sewer catchments delineated from network connectivity, terrain, and pumping boundaries
• Upstream tracing identifies contributors to blockages, overflows, and treatment inflows
• Manhole attributes capture cover level, invert depth, chamber condition, and access constraints
• Stormwater drainage paths compared with mapped pipes, channels, culverts, and outfalls
• Overflow hotspots ranked using incident history, capacity indicators, and receiving-water sensitivity

Participants can design controlled field workflows for inspection and asset-update records.

• Field forms capture asset identifiers, coordinates, condition codes, photographs, and comments
• Required-field rules prevent incomplete inspection and work-completion submissions
• GPS metadata records receiver type, correction source, estimated accuracy, and timestamp
• Photo naming conventions link images to assets, inspections, defects, and work orders
• As-built redlines converted into reviewable GIS edits with source-document references
• Supervisor approval workflows separate proposed updates from authoritative network records

Participants can specify mobile GIS workflows that support field crews and supervisors.

• Offline map areas prepared for sites with limited cellular coverage
• Crew maps display assets, isolation valves, hazards, permits, and access notes
• Inspection forms use conditional logic for asset type, defect severity, and follow-up
• Barcode and QR code scans retrieve verified asset records during field visits
• Work assignments spatially prioritised by proximity, risk, due date, and crew capability
• Mobile edits synchronised through conflict rules, review queues, and audit trails

Participants can select remote-sensing data sources for defined utility information needs.

• Spatial, spectral, temporal, and radiometric resolution compared for utility applications
• Orthophotos assessed for asset visibility, update frequency, and positional reliability
• Multispectral imagery interpreted using visible, near-infrared, and shortwave-infrared bands
• LiDAR point clouds distinguish terrain, buildings, vegetation, and surface infrastructure
• Satellite-data acquisition planned around cloud cover, revisit interval, and seasonality
• Remote-sensing limitations documented before operational or capital decisions are made

Participants can identify operationally relevant land and surface changes from imagery.

• Visual interpretation uses tone, texture, shape, shadow, pattern, and site context
• Normalized Difference Vegetation Index identifies vegetation stress near buried pipelines
• Image classification separates impervious surfaces, vegetation, water, bare ground, and buildings
• Change detection compares classified imagery across approved acquisition dates
• Construction encroachment identified near easements, reservoirs, treatment sites, and trunk mains
• Interpretation confidence recorded with source imagery, analyst notes, and verification status

Participants can derive terrain products for drainage, flood and access assessments.

• Digital terrain models generated from classified ground-return LiDAR points
• Slope, aspect, and hillshade reveal drainage paths and terrain constraints
• Flow direction and accumulation model surface runoff toward inlets and watercourses
• Depression analysis identifies ponding locations near facilities, roads, and access routes
• Flood-exposure screening intersects terrain, water levels, critical assets, and service areas
• Terrain outputs validated against field observations, drainage drawings, and incident records

Participants can produce spatially informed asset-risk and renewal priority rankings.

• Risk matrices combine probability of failure with consequence of failure
• Pipe failure history normalised by length, age cohort, material, and pressure zone
• Condition scores integrated with criticality, repair cost, access difficulty, and customer impact
• Multi-criteria decision analysis weights renewal factors through documented stakeholder agreement
• Priority maps distinguish immediate interventions, planned renewals, monitoring, and data investigation
• Sensitivity testing shows how changed weights alter renewal programme rankings

Participants can define GIS integration requirements for maintenance and customer-service processes.

• Work-order locations matched to assets using identifiers, addresses, coordinates, and spatial joins
• Failure codes standardised for bursts, leaks, blockages, overflows, and service interruptions
• Customer complaints geocoded for clustering, repeat-contact analysis, and service-area reporting
• Integration mappings define system ownership, update frequency, error handling, and reconciliation
• Application programming interfaces assessed for authentication, rate limits, and transaction controls
• Incident dashboards combine work orders, customer contacts, network assets, and field status

Participants can produce clear map products for field, operational and management audiences.

• Scale-dependent symbology preserves readability for network maps at multiple zoom levels
• Water and wastewater assets symbolised using controlled colours, sizes, labels, and status cues
• Map layouts include north arrow, scale bar, legend, source date, and coordinate grid
• Operational incident maps prioritise isolation boundaries, hazards, access routes, and customers
• Management maps present risk concentrations, capital needs, performance trends, and uncertainty
• Print and digital products reviewed against audience tasks and decision timeframes

Participants can plan governed web GIS products for internal utility users.

• Web map layers configured for authoritative assets, reference data, incidents, and inspection results
• Role-based access separates public, contractor, operational, and administrator permissions
• Dashboards define indicators for breaks, overflows, work backlog, data quality, and response times
• OGC web-service principles support interoperable sharing of approved spatial datasets
• Metadata records purpose, custodian, update cycle, quality limits, and access restrictions
• Publishing checklists test performance, permissions, symbology, labels, and source currency

Participants can establish governance controls for authoritative utility spatial information.

• Data stewardship assigns accountable owners, custodians, editors, reviewers, and consumers
• Authoritative-data designation identifies approved sources for operational and statutory use
• Edit permissions apply least-privilege principles to sensitive network and customer data
• Audit trails record who changed features, attributes, geometry, and approval status
• Retention schedules distinguish operational records, survey evidence, imagery, and superseded plans
• Business continuity procedures protect critical GIS services during utility incidents

Participants can prepare a phased GIS improvement plan with measurable controls.

• Current-state assessment documents datasets, applications, integrations, skills, and operating pain points
• Target architecture links field capture, enterprise data, analysis, publication, and governance
• Data remediation backlog prioritised by safety, service continuity, regulatory, and financial risk
• Implementation roadmap sequences quick wins, dependencies, procurement, testing, and adoption
• Success measures define accuracy, completeness, update timeliness, utilisation, and response-time targets
• Change-management actions address process ownership, training, communications, and user support

Participants can build, review and present a complete GIS package for a defined utility operational case.

• Capstone brief defines service problem, data sources, users, constraints, and decision requirements
• Asset data model documents features, attributes, identifiers, domains, and relationships
• Quality assessment records topology defects, missing fields, positional uncertainty, and remediation actions
• Network analysis produces trace, isolation, catchment, or risk outputs for the case
• Remote-sensing evidence supports terrain, land-use, flood, or asset-condition findings
• Implementation plan specifies publication products, governance controls, priorities, and performance measures